Boycott Mobil - 98 Octane ripoff

[Ext User(Ben Thomas)]

Hi all,

Last week Mobil decided to increase the price difference between regular
unleaded and 98 octane premium by a further 0.5cpl. No doubt to simply
take advantage of the increased number of cars on the road that require
98 octane fuel as a minimum standard - VW Golf is one example.

I could understand a 2.5-3% price increase sort of in-line with
inflation, but not 5%.

Will have to see what Shell and BP are charging for the good stuff.

A few years ago one of the majors was selling 98 octane for 9cpl more
than regular, and the rest were selling it for 10cpl more than regular.
I have a feeling it was Mobil that was a bit cheaper than the others.

Ben

[Ext User(Rod)]

In article <ntvvp3-hq.ln1@teri.unico.com.au>, no.sp@m.thanks.mate
says...

> Last week Mobil decided to increase the price difference between regular
> unleaded and 98 octane premium by a further 0.5cpl. No doubt to simply
> take advantage of the increased number of cars on the road that require
> 98 octane fuel as a minimum standard - VW Golf is one example.
>
> I could understand a 2.5-3% price increase sort of in-line with
> inflation, but not 5%.

Been awhile since I did maths at uni, but that would equate to a
~0.5% increase. So do you still want to boycott them since you
could understand a 3% increase?

--
Cheers,
Rod.

[Ext User(mark jb)]

> A few years ago one of the majors was selling 98 octane for 9cpl more than
> regular, and the rest were selling it for 10cpl more than regular. I have
> a feeling it was Mobil that was a bit cheaper than the others.

The standard gap is now +7c 95PULP and +12c 98PULP.
If you're that worried about half a cent per litre (less than 40c/tankful on
a commonwhore), sell what you've got and buy a 60s mini cooper.

-mark

[Ext User(Just JT)]

"Ben Thomas" <no.sp@m.thanks.mate> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Last week Mobil decided to increase the price difference between regular
> unleaded and 98 octane premium by a further 0.5cpl. No doubt to simply
> take advantage of the increased number of cars on the road that require 98
> octane fuel as a minimum standard - VW Golf is one example.
>
> I could understand a 2.5-3% price increase sort of in-line with inflation,
> but not 5%.
>
> Will have to see what Shell and BP are charging for the good stuff.
>
> A few years ago one of the majors was selling 98 octane for 9cpl more than
> regular, and the rest were selling it for 10cpl more than regular. I have
> a feeling it was Mobil that was a bit cheaper than the others.
~~~~~~~~~~~
So WHERE is the rip-off?

--
What_Part_of_Supply_and_Demand_Don't_you_Understan d?

[Ext User(Ben Thomas)]

Rod wrote:
> In article <ntvvp3-hq.ln1@teri.unico.com.au>, no.sp@m.thanks.mate
> says...
>
>> Last week Mobil decided to increase the price difference between regular
>> unleaded and 98 octane premium by a further 0.5cpl. No doubt to simply
>> take advantage of the increased number of cars on the road that require
>> 98 octane fuel as a minimum standard - VW Golf is one example.
>>
>> I could understand a 2.5-3% price increase sort of in-line with
>> inflation, but not 5%.
>
> Been awhile since I did maths at uni, but that would equate to a
> ~0.5% increase. So do you still want to boycott them since you
> could understand a 3% increase?
>

0.5c is 5% of 10 cents.

No?

Ben

[Ext User(Ben Thomas)]

mark jb wrote:
>> A few years ago one of the majors was selling 98 octane for 9cpl more than
>> regular, and the rest were selling it for 10cpl more than regular. I have
>> a feeling it was Mobil that was a bit cheaper than the others.
>
> The standard gap is now +7c 95PULP and +12c 98PULP.
> If you're that worried about half a cent per litre (less than 40c/tankful on
> a commonwhore), sell what you've got and buy a 60s mini cooper.
>
> -mark
>
>

I can easily afford it - $2 a litre still wouldn't be a problem, but I
wonder what the justification is. Hang-on, the justification is people
will pay for it so it's perfectly reasonable.

Ben

[Ext User(John_H)]

Ben Thomas wrote:
>
>I could understand a 2.5-3% price increase sort of in-line with
>inflation, but not 5%.

You obviously haven't bought any bananas lately! :)

--
John H

[Ext User(Rod)]

In article <3r30q3-a01.ln1@teri.unico.com.au>, no.sp@m.thanks.mate
says...

> >> Last week Mobil decided to increase the price difference between regular
> >> unleaded and 98 octane premium by a further 0.5cpl. No doubt to simply
> >> take advantage of the increased number of cars on the road that require
> >> 98 octane fuel as a minimum standard - VW Golf is one example.
> >>
> >> I could understand a 2.5-3% price increase sort of in-line with
> >> inflation, but not 5%.
> >
> > Been awhile since I did maths at uni, but that would equate to a
> > ~0.5% increase. So do you still want to boycott them since you
> > could understand a 3% increase?
> >
>
> 0.5c is 5% of 10 cents.
>
> No?

I did over read the 'price difference'.

I still don't see that much of a big deal in a 0.5% increase of total
cost of the fuel.

--
Cheers,
Rod.

[Ext User(Ben Thomas)]

Just JT wrote:
> "Ben Thomas" <no.sp@m.thanks.mate> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Last week Mobil decided to increase the price difference between regular
>> unleaded and 98 octane premium by a further 0.5cpl. No doubt to simply
>> take advantage of the increased number of cars on the road that require 98
>> octane fuel as a minimum standard - VW Golf is one example.
>>
>> I could understand a 2.5-3% price increase sort of in-line with inflation,
>> but not 5%.
>>
>> Will have to see what Shell and BP are charging for the good stuff.
>>
>> A few years ago one of the majors was selling 98 octane for 9cpl more than
>> regular, and the rest were selling it for 10cpl more than regular. I have
>> a feeling it was Mobil that was a bit cheaper than the others.
> ~~~~~~~~~~~
> So WHERE is the rip-off?
>
> --
> What_Part_of_Supply_and_Demand_Don't_you_Understan d?
>
>

It _will_ bite them/us on the arse within 10 years.

What's wrong with using the fucking space bar?

Ben

[Ext User(Ben Thomas)]

John_H wrote:
> Ben Thomas wrote:
>> I could understand a 2.5-3% price increase sort of in-line with
>> inflation, but not 5%.
>
> You obviously haven't bought any bananas lately! :)
>

No effing way. I'm not pay $15/kg for something that I often don't eat
before they go off.

Ben

[Ext User(Just JT)]

"Ben Thomas" <no.sp@m.thanks.mate> wrote:
>
> It _will_ bite them/us on the arse within 10 years.
~~~~~~~~~
Oil prices are BITING now. Tell us something we don't know.

>
> What's wrong with using the fucking space bar?


--
Nothing_wrong_with_the_shagging_space_bar

[Ext User(John_H)]

Ben Thomas wrote:
>
>John_H wrote:
>> Ben Thomas wrote:
>>> I could understand a 2.5-3% price increase sort of in-line with
>>> inflation, but not 5%.
>>
>> You obviously haven't bought any bananas lately! :)
>
>No effing way. I'm not pay $15/kg for something that I often don't eat
>before they go off.

But inflation is no longer 2.5-3%.

The Government blames bananas!

--
John H

[Ext User(Ben Thomas)]

John_H wrote:
> Ben Thomas wrote:
>> John_H wrote:
>>> Ben Thomas wrote:
>>>> I could understand a 2.5-3% price increase sort of in-line with
>>>> inflation, but not 5%.
>>> You obviously haven't bought any bananas lately! :)
>> No effing way. I'm not pay $15/kg for something that I often don't eat
>> before they go off.
>
> But inflation is no longer 2.5-3%.
>
> The Government blames bananas!
>

Good point. I just did a search of gov.au - brave I know.

Apparently inflation was 4.0% for the last 12 months. Most significant
contributing factors were food: 8.3% and transportation: 7.7%.

Turns a 4% payrise into no payrise.

Ben

[Ext User(the_dawg)]

Ben Thomas wrote:

> Apparently inflation was 4.0% for the last 12 months. Most significant
> contributing factors were food: 8.3% and transportation: 7.7%.

> Turns a 4% payrise into no payrise.

The world is fucked. I really only need money to pay
taxes (and most of it goes that way - with either land
tax or GST or whatever), food, grog, various internet
services. I can make me own fuel for motor vehicle, so
that's not really a problem.

Sometimes spend money on house repairs, etc - however
I don't really see where the rest of me wage goes?!?!

[Ext User(DJ!)]

On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 01:45:03 GMT, Ben Thomas <no.sp@m.thanks.mate>
wrote:

>I can easily afford it - $2 a litre still wouldn't be a problem, but I
>wonder what the justification is. Hang-on, the justification is people
>will pay for it so it's perfectly reasonable.

We have a genius in our midst.

DJ! - OzDJ
OzDJ@clubduh.com
http://phlog.net/user/OzDJ

[Ext User(DJ!)]

On 30 Jul 2006 21:58:26 -0700, "the_dawg"
<patrick@hilux.ace.unsw.EDU.AU> wrote:


>The world is fucked. I really only need money to pay
>taxes (and most of it goes that way - with either land
>tax or GST or whatever), food, grog, various internet
>services. I can make me own fuel for motor vehicle, so
>that's not really a problem.
>
>Sometimes spend money on house repairs, etc - however
>I don't really see where the rest of me wage goes?!?!

I think you could rule out education as possibility of your cashflow
leakage, if that helps?

DJ! - OzDJ
OzDJ@clubduh.com
http://phlog.net/user/OzDJ

[Ext User(Katharine & Paul)]

i'll boycott cars requiring 98 octane. plenty of good perfomring cars that
take standard unleaded



"Ben Thomas" <no.sp@m.thanks.mate> wrote in message
news:ntvvp3-hq.ln1@teri.unico.com.au...
> Hi all,
>
> Last week Mobil decided to increase the price difference between regular
> unleaded and 98 octane premium by a further 0.5cpl. No doubt to simply
> take advantage of the increased number of cars on the road that require 98
> octane fuel as a minimum standard - VW Golf is one example.
>
> I could understand a 2.5-3% price increase sort of in-line with inflation,
> but not 5%.
>
> Will have to see what Shell and BP are charging for the good stuff.
>
> A few years ago one of the majors was selling 98 octane for 9cpl more than
> regular, and the rest were selling it for 10cpl more than regular. I have
> a feeling it was Mobil that was a bit cheaper than the others.
>
> Ben

[Ext User(Tsunami)]

"Katharine & Paul" <NOSPAM@NOSPAM.com.au> wrote in message
news:eakqrd$gh2$1@news-02.connect.com.au...
> i'll boycott cars requiring 98 octane. plenty of good perfomring cars that
> take standard unleaded
>
>
>

Just like lotsa world class race cars use 98RON I guess

[Ext User(Katharine & Paul)]

I wont be world class racing on public roads. might be an issue on race
tracks I guess


"Tsunami" <tsunam73@westnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:44ce094b$1@quokka.wn.com.au...
>
> "Katharine & Paul" <NOSPAM@NOSPAM.com.au> wrote in message
> news:eakqrd$gh2$1@news-02.connect.com.au...
>> i'll boycott cars requiring 98 octane. plenty of good perfomring cars
>> that
>> take standard unleaded
>>
>>
>>
>
> Just like lotsa world class race cars use 98RON I guess
>
>
>